Anonymous user
Talk:RC POP.OUT: Difference between revisions
→language popularity: added a showing of the before-and-after boxed html text(s), other comments.
No edit summary |
(→language popularity: added a showing of the before-and-after boxed html text(s), other comments.) |
||
Line 64:
:::::I don't know what you're talking about. Can you use the history tab and post diffs to support your accusation? -- [[User:3havj7t3nps8z8wij3g9|3havj7t3nps8z8wij3g9]] ([[User talk:3havj7t3nps8z8wij3g9|talk]]) 04:13, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
:::::: I didn't mean it as an accusation, but an observation. In any case ...
:::::: The original text was (I added line breaks for the PRE html tag):
<pre>
[[User:Gerard Schildberger]], the list is one on popularity, per
the title. The criteria may have been better worded, as always,
but what's expected is popularity. As the 2013 discussion points
out, the categories shouldn't be included as they don't measure
popularity.
-- [[User:3havj7t3nps8z8wij3g9|3havj7t3nps8z8wij3g9]]
([[User talk:3havj7t3nps8z8wij3g9|talk]]) 01:42, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
</pre>
:::::: The updated text is (I added line breaks for the PRE html tag):
<pre>
[[User:Gerard Schildberger]], the list is "popularity", per the
title. The criteria may have been better worded, as always, but
what's expected is a measure of "popularity". As the 2013 discussion
points out, the subcategory names shouldn't be included as they
don't measure popularity. What the person who wrote the criteria
meant when they said "members" was obviously "implementations".
Otherwise, what is this list of? Not popularity. There is a
contradiction, the title says one thing and the criteria another,
so we have to judge what was meant, "popularity" of languages was
clearly the intention.
-- [[User:3havj7t3nps8z8wij3g9|3havj7t3nps8z8wij3g9]]
([[User talk:3havj7t3nps8z8wij3g9|talk]]) 01:42, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
</pre>
:::::: This is via ''cut-n-paste'' from the observing differences from the ''View history'' tab. Please note that I'm not disagreeing with the veracity of your statements/text, but that the Rosetta Code task wording (task requirements) was changed. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 04:58, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
::::::: (replying to the newer text): I read the requirement: ''Sort most popular programming languages based in number of members in Rosetta Code categories ...'' exactly as stated. I saw no need to judge that requirement and conclude that he meant anything different than other what he wrote. The word '''popularity''' was clearly defined within the same sentence, and even stated where to get the needed data. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 04:58, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
: Even so, I took the ('''original''') task's description/requirements from the task, not it's discussion/talk page, or for that matter, some expectation. I would have expected that the task's requirements and/or description would be discussed first (at least by the original author of the Rosetta Code task) before it was changed. The task still states (and implies) that popularity is based on the number of members in (from) the category page, and I used (for the REXX version) the ''languages'' page to filter out the non-language entries from the category page. That may not be what some expectations are, but that is what I used when I entered the REXX language entry. I don't use the ''title'' for a task's requirement, only the task's (requirements) text. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 02:14, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
::Yeah that's fine and understood. It's not your fault. Many people have seen the flaw in the task description section and programmed according to "popularity" and not "members". -- [[User:3havj7t3nps8z8wij3g9|3havj7t3nps8z8wij3g9]] ([[User talk:3havj7t3nps8z8wij3g9|talk]]) 04:13, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
::: I never saw it as a flaw in the task description (requirements), but took it at face value. The Rosetta Code task was already a task, not a draft, so I didn't bother to contest the wording of the task. It was this (older, original) requirement that I used when coding the REXX computer language entry. If the original author wanted language entries, he should've defined what "popularity" is with some other wording instead of using the word "members". But the word "members" was used, and re-wording that '''is''' a change. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 04:58, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
<strike>
| |||